Quotes of the day

posted at 10:21 pm on February 4, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

With his gun proposals dividing Congress, President Barack Obama took his case for universal background checks and for banning some military-style weapons to the upper Midwest on Monday, looking to build public support for his measures and to apply pressure on lawmakers.

Obama argued that there’s bipartisan support for a system to undertake criminal checks on gun buyers and for gun trafficking laws but, acknowledging the political challenges he faces, would only say that the assault weapons ban deserves a vote in Congress.

‘‘We don’t have to agree on everything to agree it’s time to do something,’’ he said. …

‘‘Changing the status quo is never easy,’’ Obama said. ‘‘This will be no exception. The only way we can reduce gun violence in this county is if it the American people decide it’s important, if you decide it’s important — parents and teachers, police officers and pastors, hunters and sportsmen, Americans of every background stand up and say, ‘This time, it’s got to be different.’’’

***

Senate Democratic leaders expect a gun bill to move to the Senate floor that includes most of the proposals backed by President Barack Obama, with the notable exception of a ban on military-style, semiautomatic weapons, a top aide to Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said. …

The details provide the first snapshot of how Senate Democrats plan to move forward on major gun legislation in coming weeks.

But the strategy outline also reflects a growing sense within Democratic ranks that some of the president’s most ambitious goals—particularly the call for new bans on certain types of military-style guns often described as assault weapons—may be unrealistic, the Reid aide said.

The goal is to get the bill to the Senate floor next month, at which point lawmakers could then seek to amend the legislation by adding a ban on certain semiautomatic weapons or other provisions, the aide said.

***

REID: George, I’ve been supported by the NRA on occasion. I know Wayne LaPierre. He’s always been extremely pleasant to me. We have a good relationship. So I — I am not here to demean the organization.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But they are resisting almost everything you’ve talked about and we’ve talked about here, everything the president has called for.

REID: George, just because they resist it doesn’t mean we can’t do things. I mean, we have a lot of special interest groups that come and complain about things, and we don’t listen to them. We’ll listen to them and make the right decision.

David Axelrod suggested on Morning Joe that Chicago’s high rate of gun crime can be blamed on the fact that “surrounding areas” have lax gun laws. What is true here is that the guns used in Chicago crimes come from outside of Chicago, because they “don’t have gun stores in Chicago.” Many crime guns are purchased just outside the city limits, though more than half come from other states.

However, Illinois as a whole is fairly strict when it comes to guns — all gun owners must have a license, and it’s the only state in the nation that doesn’t allow concealed carry by private citizens under any circumstances. (This will change if Richard Posner’s recent ruling holds up.) I’m not sure how much stricter a state could be without running afoul of the Second Amendment. And the communities these guns come from typically have much lower crime rates than Chicago does. …

Frankly, I don’t think gun control has much to do with Chicago’s murder problem. It seems to be mostly gang-related, which means that (A) any guns that can’t be bought legally will be bought illegally and (B) arming the law-abiding won’t make much difference either, because the violence is taking place between criminals. We still should arm the law-abiding, so that they may defend themselves against burglaries and the like, but they are rarely the victims of gang murders.

According to a survey from Siena Research Institute, 65 percent of those polled back the measure, which was passed last month in the wake of the December shooting massacre in Newtown, Conn. Thirty percent are opposed. …

The legislation, the toughest in the country, took steps including banning certain kinds of military-style weapons, reducing the ammunition quantities weapons can hold and requiring background checks to purchase bullets.

The Church Protection Act would allow individual places of worship to decide whether to allow concealed handguns and who could carry them. The Republican-controlled House passed the bill 85-8 with bipartisan support. The measure previously passed the Republican-controlled Senate 28-4.

Arkansas joins a handful of other states, including South Carolina, Wyoming and Louisiana, that allow guns in churches, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

***

If Idahoans, like Americans in many states, have rushed to buy guns out of fear for personal safety in the aftermath of recent mass shootings, or out of fear of tighter legal controls, then democracy has already spoken, many lawmakers said. People have voted with their pocketbooks.

“Enable them to do what they believe is right,” said State Senator Marv Hagedorn, a Republican who was designated to be his chamber’s point man on proposed gun legislation in the session that began in January, describing what he sees as his mandate. “There’s a huge call to all of us to protect the Second Amendment rights.”

Every level of government in every state is, without question, looking more closely at issues of public safety since the slaughter in Newtown, Conn., of 20 children and 6 adults in an elementary school in December. But in deeply conservative states like Idaho, where President Obama got less than 33 percent of the vote in November — one of his worst showings in the nation — the discussion of school safety is occurring behind a kind of Chinese wall, separate from the question of whether certain types of guns or high-capacity magazines are to blame. …

The Idaho Department of Education has also been meeting to talk through the new terrain of school safety, even as some districts have said that they may move ahead on their own in allowing teachers and administrators to be openly armed, as Idaho law already permits.

***

According to multiple studies summarized by the Treatment Advocacy Center, these untreated mentally ill are responsible for 10% of all homicides (and a higher percentage of the mass killings), constitute 20% of jail and prison inmates and at least 30% of the homeless. Severely mentally ill individuals now inundate hospital emergency rooms and have colonized libraries, parks, train stations and other public spaces. The quality of the lives of these individuals mocks the lofty intentions of the founders of the CMHC program.

Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of this 50-year federal experiment is its inordinate cost. In 2009, 4.7 million Americans received SSI or SSDI because of mental illnesses, not including mental retardation, a tenfold increase since 1977. The total cost was $46 billion. The total Medicaid and Medicare costs for mentally ill individuals in 2005 was more than $60 billion. …

Nor is President Obama likely to do anything, since his lead agency, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, has essentially denied that a problem exists. Its contribution to the president’s response to the Dec. 14 Newtown tragedy focused only on school children and insurance coverage. And its current plan of action for 2011-14, a 41,000-word document, includes no mention of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or outpatient commitment, all essential elements in an effective plan for corrective action.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

People around me might think I’m a little weird going on about “deranged Palinistas,” but I don’t care.

bluegill on February 5, 2013 at 12:55 AM

.
BLASPHEMY ! ….. for a penance, you first need to beg forgiveness from all of us Palin fans, then get on your knees before her and bow your face with extended hands to the ground, all the while crying “I’m not worthy, I’m not worthy . . . . . . “.

I do all of my commenting using the dictation feature on iPhone 5. Once you learn how to do the punctuation, it becomes a breeze.

Having this iPhone lets me comment on HotAir no matter where I am. I do it in line at the grocery store, waiting for my doctor’s appointment, at the fitness studio, and while lounging around at home. People around me might think I’m a little weird going on about “deranged Palinistas,” but I don’t care.

bluegill on February 5, 2013 at 12:55 AM

.
Some of you need to realize that this comment section is not your personal chat room. Many, many people come to this site to read about politics, and enjoy reading comments related to the articles. Some of you regulars feel the need to great each other, say g’night, share personal stories and generally behave as if you are in some kind of chat room. I’m sure most people dont care to have to scroll through all your inconsiderate chit chat. It is getting old, and you guys really need to stop and be more respectful of others who read this site. This comment section is not your personal chit chat hotline.

Anti-Control on February 5, 2013 at 1:30 AM

.
That’s the closest thing to a “thread winner” I’ve seen on a QOTD thread.

Kasich now has to convince the state legislature to support his decision. He reportedly argued Monday that expanding Medicaid would add to state coffers and free up funds for other uses. It would also ensure that hospitals are properly compensated when they care for low-income patients, he said.
Ohio’s Medicaid program currently covers people at 90 percent of the poverty level. Kasich is up for reelection in 2014.
Families USA President Ron Pollack said in a statement that any other decision by Kasich would have been “fiscal malpractice.”

“With the federal government picking up 100 percent of the expansion costs over the next three years and never less than 90 percent thereafter, states will receive unprecedented federal help in serving their citizens,” said Pollack, whose organization supported healthcare reform.

“Now that Republican governors in Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Ohio have decided to implement the Medicaid expansion, we can expect other Republican governors to follow suit,” he said.

The dems and DC crowd have not figured out a way to abort the mentally ill (up to age 65) and still keep their vote. While they are extremely good at inspiring the dead, illegal aliens, felons they’ve not figured out a way to eliminate mentals and tally thier votes. They are working on it and I expect they’ll have this problem solved by the next election.

T- I don’t.
It is politics. All pigs in the trough. Some fatter then others.
I work in the insurance industry..guess I am not shocked.
States are calculating the impact of what is coming down the pike.

The excellent HotAir commenter crosspatch wrote the following on the Karl Rove thread. He makes VERY good points, and I wanted as many people here as possible to see his comment. It is so refreshing to see a HotAir reader who can do more than mimic the obnoxious radio host bigmouth Mark Levin:

This probably has to happen and Rove is probably the guy to pull it off. The reason is that like it or not the “Tea Party”, just the word itself, has become a pejorative in much of the country. There is no way a “Tea Party” affiliated candidate would ever win in California or New Mexico or Delaware, or many other states. People have to do two things:

1. Come to the realization that Hispanic voters will never vote for a “Tea Party” candidate no matter what. Same goes for the voters in more liberal states and a good number of them in “purple” states. I don’t care how much they detest the Democrat that is running, I promise you they detest a “Tea Party” candidate even more. Granted, this is due to a lack of understanding what the tea party movement is about, but the damage is done. The “Tea Party” brand is basically crap in a large part of the US.

2. Come to the realization that the notion that “if we run a candidate that is more conservative, we will always win” is just as laughable as the notion that Obama isn’t more popular because he isn’t liberal enough. The Democrats look like they are seriously overreaching on a lot of issues and this is turning a lot of Democrats away from the Democratic Party but it isn’t pushing them closer to “Tea Party” candidates. They would accept a Republican candidate that is fiscally conservative and will allow the people to mind their own business on social issues. The “Tea Party” is seen by many in America as a group who wants to shove extreme social conservatism down the throats of people using government as the lever. Again, this is mostly a result of a misunderstanding of the Tea Party movement and it is partially due to some drift in the Tea Party since the movement first started. Trying to run Tea Party candidates in the upper Midwest and Northeast is just not going to gain any traction.

As I mentioned above, the Democrats are overreaching on a lot of issues. Primary among those issues at the moment is the Second Amendment but there are others. People are getting tired of the blatant corruption of the Obama administration and the incompetence. Democrats are coming out against many of his candidates for various appointments. And while they might not be talking publicly, in private many of them secretly can’t wait until “this amateur” is out of the White House. Rove is giving them a place to which they can flee. Those voters can’t flee to the Tea Party. Running a Tea Party candidate in many places is like running Sarah Palin in Massachusetts, it is going to get no traction. They are both damaged brands where people have ideas based on propaganda that is basically a bunch of lies, but it is what it is.

Rove is creating a middle ground here which can attract Democrats who are not dyed in the wool liberals. He is trying to disconnect the notion that Republican = Tea Party that has been created in many places. That probably must happen because the Tea Party has walked the Republican Party way too far to the right in some areas. A Republican elected in a place like MA or DE or MN is probably going to be more liberal than one in AL or SC and it just has to be OK for that to be the case because the PEOPLE there are more liberal. Deluding yourself that running an ultra conservative candidate always wins no matter what is just crazy when you have an electorate in that area that is not conservative and would never support a Tea Party candidate.

Let Rove do what he is doing. There needs to be an alternative within the Republican Party that is not associated with the Tea Party if the Republican Party intends to remain relevant.

lol u heard that?..yes I work hard.
I am working even harder with obamacare in my lap.
Nightmare.
I am good..taking time for myself and been enjoying some fave b9 activities and taking care of my health.

The only thing crosspatch is right about is that the democrats are overreaching. The rest is crap. The Republican Party, whether tea party or est has to remember one thing- the foot soldiers of the party are SoCons, not fisc Cons. Even in these fiscally irresponsible times, without the foot soldiers (SoCons), the pubs won’t win jack.